From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-03 15:58:32
Paul A Bristow wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Tobias Schwinger
>> Sent: 01 August 2007 23:50
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [x-files] the code's out there...
> Not disgreeing with what you say, but clearly there isn't a consensus on changing the review process - probably because people are
> rightly busy with much more important, and difficult issues like SVN and the new release systems.
Does any of the suggestions we've discussed really require the review
process to be changed?
For my part, I don't think so: I have some more potential "X-files" in
the pipeline and once they're all boostified I will just request formal
review for /one/ library, simply because I'm not bold enough to ask for
five (or so) fast-track reviews at once ;-).
Pre-reviewing could also be organized separately: In fact, there has
been a post on this list recently, offering proofreading for
documentation, which seems to be a step into that direction.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk